Rational Parliament
Rational Parliament Rational Parliament is one of the key elements in Peoples Aristrocracy. This is where democracy ends, and by democracy we mean rule of majority. In Rational Parliament things function in much different manner. Instead of majority, in rational parliament we use argumentative value. In democracy tought goes like this: “Argumentative value is decided by vote of majority. Cause what is right will be voted on by majority.” That is far from truth. This system is not just so easily corruptuble, its false at its core. Why? Majority is easily manipulated, and that’s is one of they key facts why corrupt governments are able to come into power. It also creates parties, which create mob mentality, which results in lack of discussion, polarization, partialization of people in politics and courrput governments take controll of such a situation easily. One could make a book about how bad this system for society is. But at least its best what we had so far. But that not what we going to discuss right now. Lets come back to Rational Parliament. Lets first start of how is decisions made in rational parliament? Its made with 100% vote. But its not simple as that, rational parliament has set of rules that need to be followed carefully in order for this to be efficient. Lets start with nulling. Nulling is a concept in rational parliament that is used as punishment for braking the law of debate of rational parliament. What nulling exactly does? When you brake the law of debating(which we will explain bit later) and you get nulled, that means that vote of the nulled individual is ignored. Now lets look at how voting is done. Voting in Rational Parliament is done durning the debate. When you vote you need to give a reason for your vote, a legitimate argument why you voted “yes” or “no”. So rational parliament starts, and first person says “I am voting yes cause I think it is right cause of this and this”. Than other person who votes ”no” would say “I vote no cause of this and this”. Now, how is debating in rational parliament really done. It start as in example, people will be given word one by one(it will be given to dose who seek the word), and all of them will be able to state their opinion and to attack opinion of others. When word is given to individual, he will be able to receive word again only after everyone who is seeking a word has been given word once already. Now we are going to care of things that might slow down, sabotage functioning of rational parliament. Since decision demands 100% aggreement from everyone in rational parliament, that means that practically everyone has a veto power. So we know this can be easily abused, and we need to spot when it is being abused, and null the individual abusing it. So how do we know if someone is abusing his veto power? One of the most obious ways is if individual is being stubborn. So simply put, individual has no valid argumentation or all his agreements are beaten and he is still not changing his vote(be it “yes” or “no”), than it means that he is simply being stubborn. And that individual will be nulled. However here we see another problem, we must define “argument” and after that define “beaten argument” and “invalid argument”. Argument can be defined as a reason or set of reasons given in support of an idea, action or theory. Beaten argument is and argument that was already mentioned and was put down by another argument. However beaten argument can be saved anytime durning debate if the new argument arises, to support the beaten argument, that was not beaten. Otherwise individual would be repeating himself, and delaying parliament with his stubbornes. Individuals doing such a practice will be nulled. Invalid argument is and argument that doesn’t fit the discussion. But how we decide who is winner of the debate? Or which argument has overun other? There is no fully fledged practical way of deciding it. But neither its needed. Rational Parliament is not a group of parties who hate each other and constantly disagree with each other, and is stubborn with theyr opinions. Due to absence of parties, rational parliament is ment to get together people with different or same opinions, in order to have a proper, friendly, empathic, aultristic discussion over any issue. The artmosphere of rational parliament is much different than on the normal parliament. Cause in rational parliament, point is not being right, but rather seeing if you are right. With that in mind, lets finish this with “bible of rational parliament”. Bible of rational parliament is set of results of debates and conclusions that rational parliament made with its debates. This is one of they key factors in system of bratsvas. Where having legitimate resource of information is goal, that goal will be achieved with “bible of the raitonal parliament” . “bible of rational parliament” has every rational parliament. In system of dynasties, it is used as for proper generalization, in order to avoid wandering. Wandering in raitonal parliamet happens durning debate, when individual shifts the subject, that my or may not be somewhat connected to the subject of discussion. This can create great amount of delay in work of rational parliament. This is hugely avoided with “bible of rational parliament”, and if needed “temporary bible of raitonal parliament” could be created, cause sometimes “bible of rational parliament” doesn’t cover subjects that one can potential wander to. “temporary bible of rational parliament” fixes this issue. In system of bratsvas use is same, but on top of that, it will be main source of legitiamate information. As bratsvas, are more cultural-intellectual and bussiness body of People Aristocracy. Category:Government